Assessing the Understanding of Mission among Faculty, Staff and Administrators in

Jesuit Catholic Institution: University of Scranton Results

Sponsored by the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities

Office of Institutional Research Xavier University

Cincinnati, Ohio 11/10/2017

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

1

Contents Introduction and Executive Summary........................................................................................................... 2

Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 2

Key Findings .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Limitations and Future Administrations ....................................................................................................... 4

Demographic Results: University of Scranton .............................................................................................. 5

Descriptive Statistic Results: University of Scranton .................................................................................... 7

Frequency Distribution: Univeristy of Scranton vs. Aggregate ..................................................................... 8

Qualitative Thematic Analysis: University of Scranton vs. Aggregate ........................................................ 13

Appendix I: Survey Instrument ................................................................................................................... 14

Study Contributors

Mary Fugate, Research Analyst, Xavier University

Emily Shipley, Director of Institutional Research, Xavier University Riley Peick, Research Assistant Intern, Xavier University

Debra Mooney, Ph.D., Vice President for Mission and Identity, Xavier University

Participating Institutions

Creighton University Fordham University

Gonzaga University John Carroll University

Le Moyne College Marquette University

Regis University Rockhurst University

Saint Joseph's University University of Detroit Mercy

University of Scranton Xavier University

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

2

Assessing the Understanding of Mission among Faculty, Staff and Administrators in Jesuit Catholic Institutions

Introduction and Background Faculty, staff and administrators embody the mission of Jesuit Catholic universities through their everyday interactions with students, or with their indirect activities and decisions. It is easy to suggest that the understanding and practice of the mission by every individual in an institution is one of the key objectives at Jesuit Catholic Colleges and Universities. However, assessing mission from the employee perspective has not always been a priority of Jesuit Catholic institutions.

In 2013, the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities (ACCU) sponsored a project proposed by Xavier University to assess the experience of mission by faculty, staff, and administrators at Jesuit Catholic institutions. The study consisted of a survey designed to measure the extent to which the experience at their institution has contributed to faculty, staff, and administrators’ understanding and development of Jesuit Catholic mission-related values (See Appendix I). The study focused on Jesuit Catholic institutions, as roughly a decade prior, this group of universities had agreed upon a set of questions that suitably captured the intention of their mission statements. These questions have been used often to assess students’ and alumni’s understanding of mission. In September 2013, a total of 10 institutions administered the survey to their employees independently and sent their data to Xavier University for aggregate and benchmark reporting.

In 2017, the ACCU sponsored a second administration of the Survey on Jesuit Catholic Identity. A total of 12 institutions elected to participate in the September administration, including 5 institutions involved in the 2013 survey administration. In 2013, each institution independently administered the survey to their employees and sent their data to Xavier University. However, with the use of Qualtrics survey software, Xavier University was able to administer the survey to all participating universities’ employees in the most recent survey administration.

Full results from the 2017 have been summarized in an aggregate report. Results from the University of Scranton’s survey administration can be found in this report. These results include comparisons to the aggregate data for benchmarking purposes. These results also serve as a baseline for an eventual re-administration for institutions like the University of Scranton who first participated in the 2017 survey administration.

Methodology Xavier University invited all 28 Jesuit Catholic institutions to join in the second administration of the Survey on Jesuit Catholic Identity. Out of these, 12 universities chose to participate (list of institutions is in the report cover). The survey instrument consisted of a set of 20 items with a corresponding Likert scale, and two open-ended questions (Appendix I). The participant institutions were invited to add up to 10 custom questions to the survey to be included in their own administration. The University of Scranton elected to add an additional Likert scale question to the survey instrument. These results are not included in

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

3

this benchmarking report.

Xavier University’s Office of Institutional Research administered the survey in September 2017 via Qualtrics survey software. The University of Scranton elected to launch the survey on September 11, 2017, with a reminder sent on September 18, 2017. The survey closed to participants from the University of Scranton on September 25, 2017. When all surveys were closed, Xavier University performed the quantitative and qualitative analysis on the aggregated data. Data from all 12 institutions were included in the analysis as the aggregate figure for benchmarking purposes. This report contains a comparative analysis of the University of Scranton survey data as compared to the aggregate. This includes descriptive statistics for all the demographic questions and the Likert question items. Lastly, a qualitative analysis of the two open-ended questions was conducted using standard qualitative survey methodology.

Key Findings The following are the findings of the analysis:

• The response rate for the University of Scranton was 27%. This was 6% higher than the aggregate response rate of 21%.

• Of all 20 questions in the survey instrument and consistent with the aggregate survey results, the Jesuit value that respondents indicated had the highest contribution to their knowledge at their institution was "Understanding the mission of their institution" (85% responding "quite a bit" or "very much"), followed by “Understanding the Jesuit principle of being men and women for others” (82% responding "quite a bit" or "very much).

• Of all 20 questions in the survey instrument and consistent with the aggregate survey results, the Jesuit value that respondents indicated had the lowest contribution to their knowledge at their institution was "Actively working to further ecological justice and care for the environment" (46% responding "quite a bit" or "very much”). Respondents indicated that the second lowest contribution to their knowledge was “Finding the Divine in all things” (54% responding "quite a bit" or "very much”).

• The University of Scranton had higher mean scores on all questions as compared to the aggregate of all participating Jesuit institutions except the question “Actively working toward a more inclusive community.” On this question, the mean score was equal to that of the aggregate.

• The questions in which the University of Scranton had the greatest difference in mean score as compared to the aggregate were “Speaking to others (i.e. students colleagues) about Jesuit Catholic values” (a 0.22 higher mean score than the aggregate), “Devoting effort to help others in need” (a 0.22 higher mean score than the aggregate), and “Understanding the Jesuit principle of being men and women for others” (a 0.20 higher mean score than the aggregate).

• The questions in which the University of Scranton had the smallest difference in mean score as compared to the aggregate were “Actively working toward a more inclusive community” (no difference in mean score compared to the aggregate), “Demonstrating respect for others’ differences” (a 0.01 higher mean score than the aggregate), and “Ability to look critically at society and its institutions” (a 0.03 higher mean score than the aggregate).

The results of the qualitative analysis of the open-ended responses provided important insights. The most

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

4

salient findings in those themes are:

• Respondents from the University of Scranton indicated that the theme “Many opportunities to attend conferences, retreats, lectures, and other similar experiences” (cited 118 times, 46% of responses) had the greatest influence on understanding Jesuit Catholic mission, identity/and or values. This was consistent with the aggregate results.

• Respondents from the University of Scranton indicated that second greatest influence on their understanding of Jesuit Catholic mission, identity, and/or values was “Service opportunities provided by the institution, including service learning projects, annual days of service, and mission trips” (cited 60 times, 23% of responses), followed closely by “Everyday life on campus, including conversations with colleagues, interactions with Jesuit clergy, daily mass, and the nature of the work itself” (cited 58 times, 22.5% of responses). In the aggregate results, respondents indicated that the second greatest influence on their understanding of Jesuit Catholic missions, identity, and/or values was “Everyday life on campus, including conversations with colleagues, interactions with Jesuit clergy, daily mass, and the nature of the work itself.”

• Regarding the question on their hope for Jesuit Catholic higher education for the future, most respondents from the University of Scranton cited that, in the future, they wish for Jesuit Catholic institutions to continue their commitment in providing excellent education through Jesuit Catholic values, and would grow its commitment to these values even more (cited 55 times, 24% of responses). These results were consistent with the aggregate.

• The second greatest hope respondents cited was “More focus on social justice on campus (including serving the community, promoting diversity & inclusivity, space for open dialogue, etc.)” (cited 50 times, 22% of the University of Scranton’s responses). These results were consistent with the aggregate.

• New response themes were created in the 2017 survey results that were not themes in the 2013 survey results. These themes include: That it would continue to exist, thrive, grow, and be promoted to wide audiences; That Catholic religious identity and Ignatian Spirituality would be maintained and emphasized; Employees would be treated fairly, would have access to programs to learn about the mission, and be trained as competent lay people; and The focus would be on mission rather than finances and the bottom line.

• Respondents also indicated their wish for a continued commitment to developing and caring for the whole person (Cura Personalis), as well as that Jesuit Catholic education becomes more affordable and more available to all people.

Limitations and Future Administrations It is important to note that although this survey instrument has been able to provide baseline and benchmarking analysis and results, the survey questions are only measuring how each institution has contributed to “knowledge” of the various questions prompts, not how each institution has promoted living or teaching the various values of the Jesuit Catholic mission. Thus, respondents may have scored each question lower based on understanding the mission and Jesuit values from experiences outside of the institution.

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

5

In future survey administrations, there is great potential to revise the survey instrument to account for some bias in the results by adding questions that would enhance the understanding of how employees of Jesuit Catholic institutions apply values to their professional and personal lives. Future revisions of the survey instrument can begin with reviewing the additional questions each university was invited to include on the end of their survey, and decide what questions would be generalizable and relevant to the broader employee population of Jesuit Catholic institutions.

Demographic Results: University of Scranton

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

6

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

7

Descriptive Statistic Results: University of Scranton

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

8

Frequency Distribution: University of Scranton vs. Aggregate Survey of Faculty, Staff and Administrators on Jesuit Catholic Identity, September 2017 University of Scranton - Frequencies and Comparative Frequencies University of

Scranton All other

participants N % N %

A. What is your primary function? Faculty 100 39.2% 1686 30.4% Staff - hourly/non-exempt 48 18.8% 812 14.6% Staff - salaried/exempt 76 29.8% 1240 22.4% Administrator (department chair/director-level and above) 30 11.8% 623 11.2% Null/No Response 0 0.0% 8 0.1% Total 255 100.0% 4369 78.8% B. What is your employment status? Full-Time 240 94.1% 3898 70.3% Part-Time 14 5.5% 460 8.3% Null/No Response 1 0.4% 11 0.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 78.8% C. What is your sex? Female 152 59.6% 2615 47.2% Male 101 39.6% 1721 31.0% Null/No Response 2 0.8% 33 0.6% Total 255 100.0% 4369 78.8% D. What is your age range? 24 or under 3 1.2% 63 1.4% 25-34 26 10.2% 656 15.0% 35-44 56 22.0% 928 21.2% 45-54 78 30.6% 1138 26.0% 55-64 56 22.0% 1068 24.4% 65 or older 36 14.1% 484 11.1% Null/No Response 0 0.0% 32 0.7% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% E. What is your religious affiliation? Agnostic 10 3.9% 306 7.0% Atheist 7 2.7% 193 4.4% Buddhist 0 0.0% 34 0.8% Christian-Catholic 165 64.7% 2194 50.2% Christian-Orthodox 5 2.0% 40 0.9% Christian – Protestant (Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc.) 42 16.5% 983 22.5% Hindu 0 0.0% 13 0.3%

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

9

Jewish 2 0.8% 107 2.4% Muslim 3 1.2% 19 0.4% Sikh 0 0.0% 0 0.0% None 11 4.3% 256 5.9% Other 9 3.5% 195 4.5% Null/No Response 1 0.4% 29 0.7% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% F. How long have you worked at this institution? Less than a year 11 4.3% 400 9.2% 1 to 5 years 63 24.7% 1277 29.2% 6 to 10 years 56 22.0% 840 19.2% 11 or more years 125 49.0% 1842 42.2% Null/No Response 0 0.0% 10 0.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% G. To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge of the following? 1. Understanding the mission of your institution

1. Very little 5 2.0% 80 1.8% 2. Some 20 7.8% 452 10.3% 3. Quite a bit 71 27.8% 1372 31.4% 4. Very much 145 56.9% 2227 51.0% 99. Null/No Response 14 5.5% 238 5.4% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.48 3.39

2. Devoting effort to help others in need

1. Very little 10 3.9% 190 4.3% 2. Some 31 12.2% 920 21.1% 3. Quite a bit 84 32.9% 1513 34.6% 4. Very much 115 45.1% 1501 34.4% 99. Null/No Response 15 5.9% 245 5.6% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.27 3.05

3. Leading by example 1. Very little 19 7.5% 262 6.0% 2. Some 46 18.0% 944 21.6% 3. Quite a bit 75 29.4% 1423 32.6% 4. Very much 98 38.4% 1479 33.9% 99. Null/No Response 17 6.7% 261 6.0% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.06 3.00

4. Increasing your awareness of the relationship between global and local issues

1. Very little 22 8.6% 351 8.0% 2. Some 58 22.7% 1248 28.6% 3. Quite a bit 90 35.3% 1490 34.1% 4. Very much 69 27.1% 1029 23.6% 99. Null/No Response 16 6.3% 251 5.7% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0%

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

10

Mean 2.86 2.78 5. Actively working to further social justice

1. Very little 18 7.1% 313 7.2% 2. Some 43 16.9% 1102 25.2% 3. Quite a bit 93 36.5% 1424 32.6% 4. Very much 86 33.7% 1274 29.2% 99. Null/No Response 15 5.9% 256 5.9% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.03 2.89

6. Defining your own values and beliefs

1. Very little 29 11.4% 467 10.7% 2. Some 50 19.6% 1107 25.3% 3. Quite a bit 88 34.5% 1268 29.0% 4. Very much 73 28.6% 1268 29.0% 99. Null/No Response 15 5.9% 259 5.9% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.85 2.81

7. Demonstrating respect for others’ differences

1. Very little 21 8.2% 272 6.2% 2. Some 48 18.8% 871 19.9% 3. Quite a bit 67 26.3% 1345 30.8% 4. Very much 103 40.4% 1615 37.0% 99. Null/No Response 16 6.3% 266 6.1% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.05 3.05

8. Actively working toward a more inclusive community

1. Very little 25 9.8% 301 6.9% 2. Some 44 17.3% 1001 22.9% 3. Quite a bit 86 33.7% 1382 31.6% 4. Very much 84 32.9% 1421 32.5% 99. Null/No Response 16 6.3% 264 6.0% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.96 2.96

9. Ability to look critically at society and its institutions

1. Very little 28 11.0% 364 8.3% 2. Some 51 20.0% 1121 25.7% 3. Quite a bit 84 32.9% 1416 32.4% 4. Very much 76 29.8% 1198 27.4% 99. Null/No Response 16 6.3% 270 6.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.87 2.84

10. Making ethical decisions in personal situations

1. Very little 34 13.3% 488 11.2% 2. Some 48 18.8% 1078 24.7% 3. Quite a bit 75 29.4% 1228 28.1% 4. Very much 82 32.2% 1301 29.8% 99. Null/No Response 16 6.3% 274 6.3% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.86 2.82

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

11

11. Making ethical decisions in professional situations

1. Very little 26 10.2% 386 8.8% 2. Some 55 21.6% 1044 23.9% 3. Quite a bit 66 25.9% 1295 29.6% 4. Very much 92 36.1% 1377 31.5% 99. Null/No Response 16 6.3% 267 6.1% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.94 2.89

12. Understanding the Jesuit principle of being men and women for others

1. Very little 12 4.7% 231 5.3% 2. Some 18 7.1% 644 14.7% 3. Quite a bit 70 27.5% 1292 29.6% 4. Very much 138 54.1% 1942 44.4% 99. Null/No Response 17 6.7% 260 6.0% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.40 3.20

13. Making connections between your intellectual and spiritual life

1. Very little 31 12.2% 549 12.6% 2. Some 51 20.0% 1150 26.3% 3. Quite a bit 79 31.0% 1227 28.1% 4. Very much 75 29.4% 1177 26.9% 99. Null/No Response 19 7.5% 266 6.1% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.84 2.74

14. Actively working to further ecological justice and care for the environment

1. Very little 39 15.3% 717 16.4% 2. Some 81 31.8% 1498 34.3% 3. Quite a bit 72 28.2% 1183 27.1% 4. Very much 45 17.6% 703 16.1% 99. Null/No Response 18 7.1% 268 6.1% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.52 2.46

15. Finding the Divine in all things

1. Very little 41 16.1% 813 18.6% 2. Some 59 23.1% 1222 28.0% 3. Quite a bit 69 27.1% 1028 23.5% 4. Very much 68 26.7% 1035 23.7% 99. Null/No Response 18 7.1% 271 6.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.69 2.56

16. Advancing human rights 1. Very little 25 9.8% 437 10.0% 2. Some 51 20.0% 1270 29.1% 3. Quite a bit 98 38.4% 1370 31.4% 4. Very much 63 24.7% 1023 23.4% 99. Null/No Response 18 7.1% 269 6.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.84 2.73

17. Pursuing peace 1. Very little 25 9.8% 480 11.0%

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

12

2. Some 57 22.4% 1278 29.3% 3. Quite a bit 93 36.5% 1325 30.3% 4. Very much 61 23.9% 1013 23.2% 99. Null/No Response 19 7.5% 273 6.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.81 2.70

18. Working for the common good and well-being of all

1. Very little 25 9.8% 317 7.3% 2. Some 37 14.5% 954 21.8% 3. Quite a bit 83 32.5% 1386 31.7% 4. Very much 92 36.1% 1435 32.8% 99. Null/No Response 18 7.1% 277 6.3% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 3.02 2.96

19. Making decisions through reflection, prayer, and discernment

1. Very little 35 13.7% 691 15.8% 2. Some 49 19.2% 1048 24.0% 3. Quite a bit 72 28.2% 1173 26.8% 4. Very much 81 31.8% 1187 27.2% 99. Null/No Response 18 7.1% 270 6.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.84 2.70

20. Speaking to others (i.e. students, colleagues) about Jesuit Catholic values

1. Very little 35 13.7% 753 17.2% 2. Some 46 18.0% 1068 24.4% 3. Quite a bit 70 27.5% 1131 25.9% 4. Very much 86 33.7% 1146 26.2% 99. Null/No Response 18 7.1% 271 6.2% Total 255 100.0% 4369 100.0% Mean 2.87 2.65

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

13

Qualitative Thematic Analysis: University of Scranton vs. Aggregate

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

14

Appendix I: Survey Instrument Survey of Faculty, Staff and Administrators on Jesuit Catholic Identity

Please answer the following questions. Participation is entirely voluntary. You may skip any questions you do not feel comfortable answering. Your decision will have no effect on any future services you may be entitled from the University. You are free to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty.

A. What is your primary function?

a. Faculty b. Staff - hourly/non-exempt c. Staff - salaried/exempt

B. What is your employment status? a. Full-time b. Part-time

C. What is your sex?

a. Female b. Male

D. What is your age range?

a. 24 or under b. 25-34 c. 35-44 d. 45-54 e. 55-64 f. 65 or older

E. What is your religious affiliation?

a. Agnostic b. Atheist c. Buddhist d. Christian – Catholic e. Christian - Orthodox f. Christian – Protestant (Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc.) g. Hindu h. Jewish i. Muslim j. Sikh k. None l. Other

F. How long have you worked at this institution? a. Less than a year

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

15

b. 1 to 5 years c. 6 to 10 years d. 11 or more years

G. To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge of the following?

A. Very Little

B. Some

C. Quite a

bit

D. Very

Much 1. Understanding the mission of your institution

2. Devoting effort to help others in need 3. Leading by example

4. Increasing your awareness of the relationship between global and local issues

5. Actively working to further social justice 6. Defining your own values and beliefs

7. Demonstrating respect for others’ differences 8. Actively working toward a more inclusive community 9. Ability to look critically at society and its institutions

10. Making ethical decisions in personal situations 11. Making ethical decisions in professional situations

12. Understanding the Jesuit principle of being men and women for others

13. Making connections between your intellectual and spiritual life

14. Actively working to further ecological justice and care for the environment

15. Finding the Divine in all things 16. Advancing human rights

17. Pursuing peace 18. Working for the common good and well-being of all

19. Making decisions through reflection, prayer, and discernment

20. Speaking to others (i.e. students, colleagues) about Jesuit Catholic values

H. Please describe one or more programs, experiences or activities at your institution which significantly enhanced your understanding of Jesuit Catholic mission, identity and/or values.

H. What is your hope for Jesuit Catholic higher education in the future?

November 10, 2017

Office of Institutional Research, Xavier University

16

Additional Questions:

Q1 To what extent do you believe The University of Scranton is fulfilling its mission in the following practices?

A. Very Little

B. Somewhat

C. Quite a

Bit

D. Very Much

A commitment to the poor, marginalized and those seeking justice through our academic and co-curricular activities.

The ethic of care for the whole person by supporting transformative experiences for all members of the University

community.

Providing opportunities for experiential learning, including global engagement, for our students.

Providing integrated student support policies and activities that help to create a transformational educational experience.

Inviting and inspiring students to reflect upon and assess their own learning and development.

Responsible stewardship by prioritizing and allocating the necessary resources to continue to provide an affordable, accessible, and transformative educational experience to

students.

Governance supported by policies and practices that contribute to inclusive, transparent, and responsive processes.

Leadership and administrative practices that contribute to an engaged and committed University community.